A few questions that need resolving regarding this article
1) Why the inclusion of the actions of individuals? Surely the point of corporate behaviour is that it is the action of a corporation in itself, although these actions may not always be the intended ourcome of any individuals involved. Furthermore whilst the effects of corporate behaviour on individuals may be a useful sociological side effect I do not see this as central to the issue of corporate behaviour.
2) I think an explicit division needs to be made between business/capitalist corporations and noncapitalist corporations (NGOs, charities etc) as I think the proposed rules of corporate behaviour can only be seen to apply to capitalist corporations.
If no-one disagrees with this would people like me to attempt these changes (removal of references to indiviudals, creation of distinction between business and non-business coporations)? Muppet317 12/12/05
Muppet317: Go ahead and edit the page. Your points are well made. Divisions make sense and perhaps more divisions than you mentioned are required, for I feel there is are great difference between the circumstances, opportunites and and behaviour of the largest corporations and the smallest. I would, however, like you to please include a paragraph or sentence that indicates that it is possible for an individual or group to exhibit corporate behaviour (captialist form or otherwise), that is, think/behave like a corporation. This is justified under the title of corporate behaviour, but perhaps needs to be placed under a subtitle such as, 'The influence of corporate behaviour on society'. What do you think?
(Other titles also come to mind such as, 'The influence of corporate behaviour on the environment', 'The influence of corporate behaviour on the media' and 'The influence of corporate behaviour on politics and government'.)
By the way, my aim was not to post a anti-corporation or controversial article. I just wanted to start an article about something that is not often written/read about in this format and that people may need more information about. Clearly my first attempt contained information that may have made capitalist corporations seem a negative. This was not my whole intention. I hope the page can be developed in a more even way, but we should not avoid valid and factual information that makes certain corporations, people or groups feel uncomfortable. Regards, Stuart J. Davis 14/12/05
Stuart Cheers, Will do my best! Muppet317 14/12/05
The 81.179.253.7 edit (addition to 11 rules of corporate behaviour) was me, forgot to login Muppet317 18:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite done, please edit away, i took off the NPOV disputation as the article is now totally different, and I changed the word rules for characteristeritcs as although this word has wekaer connotations it is less likely to offend so hopefully this article can avoid any NPOV problems for a while! Muppet317 19:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Muppet317 Looks good. I will give it a read and make some notes. If I edit I will not edit the text directly. I will instead place it on this discussion board. I think that will be best. Regards, SJD 15/12/05
